Send a Message

Journal Community

Your message has been sent.

Journal Community

Make a Connection

Journal Community

Your message has been sent.

Absolutely! The quest for knowledge, which has almost always been lead by astronomy since pre-history, is worth the risks. Believe me, these astronauts, if they didn't want to take the risks, would be replaced by hundreds of others in line just waiting to take their place. Some people never want to leave the comfort of home, if we listened to them all of the time, we wouldn't even be here as a species anymore. Exploration and knowledge hold the keys to our own survival. Those who don't believe this basic tenet of our makeup should go gather some more nuts and berries.

Send a Message

Journal Community

Your message has been sent.

Journal Community

Make a Connection

Journal Community

Your message has been sent.

Yes we do it inspire the human race to dream to havens.It's one few area that mankind can work together for greater good without causing war or creativing bigger problems for the planet.Let be honest if someone you go into space wouldn't take that trip in a heart beat I would.Yes no want lose no one space but you need take risk inorder get something one.Mankind is always been a race of explores so why should not go to space.The knowledge that we get from space benfit all from us.

Send a Message

Journal Community

Your message has been sent.

Journal Community

Make a Connection

Journal Community

Your message has been sent.

There is nothing in the universe that could be brought back that would be worth even a hundredth of the cost of the trip. The idea shows that some well intended people have no understanding of engineering or economics of manufacturing. NASA already wasted 800 billion dollars to bring back 600 pounds of rocks, in two trips.Every time someone lists inventions or innovations that supposedly came from NASA Goggle those innovations and see who really created them. You will be amazed at how very little the world got from NASA. While the USA went to the moon other countries invested in production and manufacturing innovation that took manufacturing away from the USA.

Send a Message

Journal Community

Your message has been sent.

Journal Community

Make a Connection

Journal Community

Your message has been sent.

Many objective measures show the positive impact of Hubble data on astronomy. Over 9,000 papers based on Hubble data have been published in peer-reviewed journals, and countless more have appeared in conference proceedings. Looking at papers several years after their publication, about one-third of all astronomy papers have no citations, while only 2% of papers based on Hubble data have no citations. On average, a paper based on Hubble data receives about twice as many citations as papers based on non-Hubble data. Of the 200 papers published each year that receive the most citations, about 10% are based on Hubble data.

Although the HST has clearly helped astronomical research, its financial cost has been large. A study on the relative astronomical benefits of different sizes of telescopes found that while papers based on HST data generate 15 times as many citations as a 4 m ground-based telescope such as the William Herschel Telescope, the HST costs about 100 times as much to build and maintain.

Deciding between building ground- versus space-based telescopes is complex. Even before Hubble was launched, specialized ground-based techniques such as aperture masking interferometry had obtained higher-resolution optical and infrared images than Hubble would achieve, though restricted to targets about 108 times brighter than the faintest targets observed by Hubble. Since then, advances in adaptive optics have extended the high-resolution imaging capabilities of ground-based telescopes to the infrared imaging of faint objects. The usefulness of adaptive optics versus HST observations depends strongly on the particular details of the research questions being asked. In the visible bands, adaptive optics can only correct a relatively small field of view, whereas HST can conduct high-resolution optical imaging over a wide field. Only a small fraction of astronomical objects are accessible to high-resolution ground-based imaging; in contrast Hubble can perform high-resolution observations of any part of the night sky, and on objects that are extremely faint.